The encyclical ‘Laudato si” and “integral ecology”

Yesterday His Excellency Most Reverend Robert C. Morlino, the Extraordinary Ordinary of Madison, was on with a popular radio show host, Vicki McKenna – who really ought to have a national show! – to talk about Laudato si’.

Also, since Rush’s critical remarks about the encyclical were played in the program, you might want to check his first two hours yesterday. He also took on Card. Wuerl, who had attacked Rush on Fox News Sunday. HERE

Bp. Morlino had a great hour. One of this things he mentioned was a troubling phrase in the encyclical, “integral ecology”. You can listen to the hour for free HERE.

In some spheres, “integral ecology” is troubling.

I found the phrase 9 times in the encyclical. Chapter 4 is: “Integral Ecology”

I’ll bet some of you know more about this than I do.

Question might be, if the phrase “integral ecology” has some less than acceptable connotations, why use it in an encyclical?

Of course we have to figure out what it means in this encyclical, not merely in some other source.

On the Verge of a Planetary Civilization: A Philosophy of Integral Ecology; by Sam Mickey

reviews…..

This book is much needed. The book skilfully and articulately brings together difficult concepts from the philosophies of event-oriented ontology, object-oriented ontology, and speculative realism to bear on our contemporary ecological crises. Furthermore, the book does not merely think about ecology, but begins to ask how ecological thinking changes our ways of thinking, doing ethics, and philosophizing in general. (Whitney Bauman, Assistant Professor of Religious Studies, Florida International University)

The ongoing reinvention of our thought tradition is soaring into the task of developing a new philosophy of Earth, a philosophy of Gaia, a philosophy powerful enough to effect a fundamental transformation of humanity’s functioning within the enveloping community of life. For anyone interested in joining this historic venture, there is no better pathway in than Sam Mickey’s book.
(Brian Thomas Swimme, California Institute of Integral Studies.)

Reading major postmodern theorists in the light of integral theory, Sam Mickey’s path-breaking book points the way to environmentalism of the future. He has made an important contribution toward our understanding of the emergent, subtle, and complex entwining of humankind and nature. Highly recommended for those who want to understand the cutting edge of contemporary environmental theory.
(Michael E. Zimmerman, professor of philosophy, University of Colorado at Boulder)

About the Author…..
Sam Mickey is adjunct professor in theology and religious studies, and environmental studies at the University of San Francisco. He is a co-editor of Integral Ecologies (forthcoming) and has published articles in numerous journals.

They used the phrase “integral ecology” 9 times because they wanted to use THAT phrase.

Card. Weurl’s response to Rush’s sound bite was pretty condescending.
Rush has pointed out some of the good and bad in this encyclical. I’ve heard nothing from the MSM about the points on abortion and respect for human life. Rush was also right to point out that the global warming aspect of this encyclical was hatched in a liberal echo chamber. If the Pontifical Academy of the Sciences wants to live up to the Catholic history of use of the scientific method, it would have listened to dissenting views on global warming and then investigated and responded with data instead of shutting down the conversation.

I do think this encyclical will be used by democrat politicians to salve the consciences of their Catholic voters, and to attack Catholic republicans. The unborn are so yesterday; the new pro-life is caring for the environment.

“I think we have two groups of [environmental] extremists. There are, of course, those people on one side who would pave the country over in the name of progress. There is an extremist group on the other extreme you build a house unless it looked like a bird’s nest. Now I think there has to be a commonsense in-between that recognizes that the people are ecology, too.”

Card. Wuerl attacked Rush? On the contrary, it was the other way around! Card. Wuerl’s comments were very polite and reasonable. [Apparently your ear isn’t tuned to how prelates talk.]

Rush, however, told outright lies about the content of the encyclical (and when a caller called him on it, citing paragraph 188 to prove that Rush’s attacks were inaccurate, he KEPT lying). Does it concern you at all that Rush was caught in a lie that was very demonstrably false but would not concede it? I find it very troubling, personally. [You’ve leapt to a rash judgment about what troubles me or what doesn’t.]

I don’t see anything troubling about the term “integral ecology.” Everything on this planet is interconnected – humans, animals, plants, the environment. The state of one can affect the state of another. [Perhaps there is a lot about this discussion that you haven’t figured out yet. Reading comments for while might help you out. In the meantime, while waiting for more comments, re-read the top entry.]

Brian Swimme was a protege of Fr Thomas Berry (who was a lot like Matthew Fox, but was never formally condemned), and is one of today’s leading voices promoting “the Universe Story” or “Conscious Evolution” (the ideas that readers of this blog associate with Barbara Marx Hubbard) to Catholics.

I think the Holy Father is NOT naive about this stuff. Remember the CDF’s attention to the LCWR on these issues, for instance this speech by Cardinal Muller http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/cardinal-mueller-s-address-to-presidency-of-the-leadership-conference-of-women-religious . And Pope Francis was kept informed by Cardinal Muller, and PF backed him up. I believe Pope Francis is engaging with them and proposing a Catholic way of thinking about the same subject matter. It would make sense if the term “integral ecology” was used in the encyclical to direct their attention to this Catholic teaching. If anyone thinks the only “dialog” he is trying to start is with “global warming deniers” I think that is mistaken, there are other serious issues he is trying to engage.

Initially, I didn’t realize that “integral ecology” was a movement but I thought it was just a made-up Teilhardian sounding phrase in keeping with the tone of the rest of the document. When I did read about it, I was seriously disturbed that the Pope would have used this phrase, which would certainly be immediately recognized by its supporters. Obviously, he himself probably didn’t insert it (remember, he boasts about never having been “on the Internet” and reading only one paper, La Repubblica, for 10 minutes a day…and he is not known for his love of other philosophical reading).

Many of the people surrounding the Pope are quite heterodox, but unfortunately, I don’t think he really cares. In his apologies to the Waldensians, he completely ignored the fact that their founders had put forth seriously heretical positions that denied just about everything in the Catholic faith, including transubstantiation. Aside from the fact that many of the attacks on them were by secular powers, because like full-blown Protestantism later on, they rapidly became a political movement, I think it is certainly understandable that they would have been rejected by orthodox Catholics.

But making it sound as if theology and philosophy are just trifling matters, even going so far as to cite an enemy philosophy in his document, is not only a mistake but gravely dangerous.

Chartgirl – indeed – I had read that someone who believed that GW is greatly influenced by sun activity was uninvited to a mtg at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.

JoAnna – words mean things. Just because you (or I for that matter) don’t understand all of the connotative meanings of any give word or phrase, that doesn’t mean we can dismiss such things when brought to our attention.

Fr Z – 1 Cor 14:8 comes to mind for this encyclical specifically, and this pontificate in general: “For if the bugle produces an indistinct sound, who will prepare himself for battle?”

Fr. Z – I didn’t leap to any conclusions. I asked if you found it concerning at all (and you didn’t answer that question). As for “my ear not being tuned,” I didn’t see anything false in what the cardinal said. Can you please clarify what Wuerl said about Rush that was untrue?

May I ask why you are more concerned about Wuerl’s alleged “tone” than about Rush’s actual, demonstrable lies?

Again, having read the comments, I don’t see what is concerning. It makes sense in the context of the entire encyclical, in which the Holy Father repeatedly says “Everything is connected” – which is absolutely true.

JuliB – the thing is we have to look at the context. In context, Pope Francis’ wording makes sense, especially given how often he repeats “Everything is connected.” I choose to follow the advice of St. Ignatius of Loyola: “Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it.”

Traductora….
” Obviously, he himself probably didn’t insert it…”
Probably he did; at the very least he certainly approved it.

“Many of the people surrounding the Pope are quite heterodox, but unfortunately, I don’t think he really cares.”
Most certainly he cares…he appoints them; and often elevates them.

“In his apologies to the Waldensians, he completely ignored the fact that their founders had put forth seriously heretical positions that denied just about everything in the Catholic faith…”
He didn’t deny it; he embraced it! Wake up!

Joanna – the cardinal was sing-songy and condescending toward Rush – it was quite blatant.
And Rush unfortunately replied in kind – but the cardinal was very antagonistic toward Rush (with a smarminess that was very disappointing).

As he pointed out, Rush is a big defender of the Church. He really is. And as an astute observer he understands how harmful LS is (because LS violates LS 188 in several ways, and because the main take away for the world is “man causes global warming, and the solution is an international bureaucracy”).

I am curious as to what Rush seemed to want say at the very end, but he held back. He said there is a reason LS is this way, but he seemed reluctant to discuss it.

JoAnna- When faced with the fact that this encyclical is infused with the language and terms of the Left in certain parts, and was championed by atheist gaia-worshipping activists, a faithful Catholic is faced with three explanations: either the Pope is naïve and being led around by bad advisors, the Pope is suffering from dementia, or the Pope is a Leftist. The far more charitable conclusion is naiveté.

Even if Francis used the words “integral ecology” in a sort of Catholic way, he knows the phrase will be spirited off by the zeitgeist in all kinds of anti-Catholic ways.
So why does he do such things?

chantgirl (12:32 PM) mentions three possibilities; Fr. John Hunwicke faces us with a fourth: “I am increasingly inclined to suspect that this Pope, while not a subtle sophisticate like his predecessor, does a rather good line in plain homely wiliness.” (See his 20 June post.) And Elizabeth D suggests above, “I believe Pope Francis is engaging with them and proposing a Catholic way of thinking about the same subject matter. ”

How would such wiliness attempt to prevent the devil from having all the interesting terminology? Would it use it in a way that they know that he knows what they mean and is not meaning that himself but is clearly trying to free the terminology from its abusers, without openly stating the fact? Is there a Papal tradition of such rhetorical strategies? If so, can one see how well they have worked in the past, what dangers they have fallen prey to, etc.?

Venerator Sti Lot- If the Pope had any control over the media, I could entertain that possibility as plausible. However, if Catholics have learned anything during the course of this pontificate, it has to be that the Pope does not control the media response to what he says or writes. Does anyone really think that just because the Pope co-opts the terminology of the Left, that the Left will change their mind on abortion, contraception, sterilization etc.? More than anything, the Pope’s adoption of leftist terminology confuses weak or uncatechised Catholics, and gives the media the sound bites to trample the faithful.

Sorry, but there is nothing innocent or explicable about the use of the term “integral ecology.” It refers to a wacky but apparently powerful and widespread syncretist, pantheistic philosophical/religious movement envisaged as the creed for a one-world government. They’re having a conference this month in California, in fact, if you really want to read about something that will make the blood drain from your extremities from sheer horror.

Two things to remember about Pope Francis, now gloriously reigning: he’s a Jesuit and he’s from the Third World. A lot of the beginning parts of the Encyclical reflect the experience of people in the Third World. Just go to Rio and see the Favellas and you’ll get a good idea. Further, Francis’ acceptance of the Global Warming thesis is based, and explicitly based, on the prevailing consensus. He’s following what the consensus says. Does he personally believe it? You can’t tell from the Encyclical. His words are too Jesuitically ambiguous. In my view Francis is following Christ’s advice to be as meek as doves and subtle as serpents. He’s a dove because he’s accepting, if only arguendo, the prevailing consensus. He’s a serpent because he’s using the consensus to attack First World hypocrisy. Global Warming is a First World invention and it’s being used to oppress the Third World (what else is new?). Francis is calling the First World’s bluff. “If you really believe this stuff,” he’s saying, “then put your money where your mouth is and act accordingly. Stop exploiting the Third World, stop taking away their resources and their wealth and leaving rubbish behind. Make the world a real community of peoples who care for each other and the environment. Treat property and wealth the way the Catholic Church has always taught property and wealth should be treated, namely as having a common destination. Private property is never exclusively private; the surplus belongs to the poor. So give them the surplus. Your own Global Warming ideology tells you that you should. But you’re just hypocritically using it to feather your own nest. Look at what your IMF and World Bank are really up to: oppression of the poor by extorting diabolic rates of interest on fiat currencies that you yourselves create out of thin air in the first place. Stop being murderous usurers and become generous givers.” When our First World masters really see what Francis is saying in Laudato Si’ they’ll hate him with a passion. He’s stuck the knife in and he’s going to twist and twist. Forget the Rush Limbaughs and the other talking heads, whichever side they are on. They are obfuscation merchants, to hide from us what the Encyclical is really up to by distracting us with angry debates on irrelevant side issues. Never underestimate a Jesuit. And never underestimate what the Holy Spirit can do when he’s got a Jesuit’s mind to work with. This dovish serpent pope has a deadly bite and he’s so subtle and devious these First World nabobs won’t know they’ve been bitten until it’s too late and the poison is already destroying their miserable hypocrisies.

William Turner’s 1912 “William of Ockham” article in the old Catholic Encyclopedia says, ‘The aim of this reformation movement in general was simplification. This aim he formulated in the celebrated “Law of Parsimony”, commonly called “Ockham’s Razor”: “Entia non sunt multiplicanda sine necessitate”.’ In these terms, I am not (so far as I intend and can judge) engaged in anything “tortured, painful”: if they are “mental gymnastics” they are what they are in the effort to be painstaking and not fail to multiply something that may be necessary – or at least useful – for proper understanding.

chantgirl writes, “More than anything, the Pope’s adoption of leftist terminology confuses weak or uncatechised Catholics, and gives the media the sound bites to trample the faithful.” That sounds pretty accurate, or at least likely, to me. As far as I can see, jacobi is right in saying, “It would have been better if the term, as it is applied in this encyclical, had been defined.” All of my questions were real questions. What is he doing – or trying to do? Has it been tried before? Often? Successfully? I think it is plausible that he is attempting wiliness and thinks it will succeed. If so, I think it is plausible that he is very much mistaken and is doing more harm than good. He may be trying to be as subtle as a serpent, but being so elaborately subtle as to tie himself in to immobilizing knots – if not worse. If discens is right that “Francis is calling the First World’s bluff. ‘If you really believe this stuff,’ he’s saying, ‘then put your money where your mouth is and act accordingly’ “, I don’t see why he would not do better to be as thoroughly explicit as discens is when putting it this way. Now he’s being accused of himself exemplifying such “First World hypocrisy” as much as Al of the numerous seldom-used constantly-heated swimming pools or the powerful people who say the situation is so desperate that huge, massively productive still-Communist China must – be given a pass on the direly urgent requirements.

Snoozle. If Francis had said explicitly what I think he’s saying implicitly, no one would listen to him. Now they have to, especially the First World elites, because he’s accepted (in my view only arguendo) their darling Global Warming thesis. So they can’t attack him without attacking themselves. But if they don’t attack him they don’t have a way to resist his Third World agenda (finally the Third World has a World voice speaking for it and not lots of hypocritical First World voices pretending to speak for it). Either way they lose. Either way Francis wins. Trump that if you can.

I was taught that were are supposed to seek Truth and Truth is Christ. Then why the constant attempts to redefine the meaning of words in this encyclical? In everything that the Pope says and publishes? Just to whom is this diversion of the meaning of certain words targeted to? Disturbing.

My teacher nuns, in parochial grade school, defined conservation (ecology) and the responsibilities as a Catholic towards God’s creation easily and succinctly. They were based upon scripture and Catholic tradition. But now, with this encyclical? You should not have to research new terms, read 10 new books, just to understand what the Pope is trying to communicate. Disturbing.

I am attempting to seek the Truth in Pope Francis’ statements and writings. “What we have here is a failure to communicate.” To me at least.

DonL, Markus. There’s no failure to communicate or indistinct bugle note in the Encyclical, but it’s communicating on more than one level. Francis is speaking to many audiences at once. Don’t try to hamstring him to fit the audience you prefer. If Christ could speak in parables whose deeper levels he only explained to his disciples, why can’t Francis speak on several levels to several audiences and use the words of each to convey his message to each? Why can’t he become all things to all men that he might win some? The guy’s brilliant and we need time to see just how brilliant. Take a look at what he recently said in Turin. He’s already using the Encyclical to make the First World elites squirm. Expect a lot more.

Many Popes have engaged in behind-the-scenes clever political maneuvering ( I am thinking especially of Pius XII and JPII with the Nazis and communists), but encyclicals are the place for straightforward, clear teaching.

That moment when Obama, Ban-ki-moon, Bill Gates, Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the elites sit down and say “Crud! The Pope has acknowledged our theory of global warming. Now we have to listen to him on abortion!”? Not going to happen.

Most here probably aren’t fans of the Remnant, but Hilary White makes some good points about the encyclical, especially the lack of scientific data undergirding an encyclical that embraces science that is not settled.

Don L, I understand the concept of different levels as some of us have advance degrees (a couple of Masters including Liturgy). But to whom is this encyclical aimed at? It appears to many that it is directed at the elitist (possibly Jesuit class?), modernist theologian class. I am sorry, but I see no parables in this encyclical. How can one seek and find Truth based upon non proven (yes, falsified) scientific fact?
Granted he may be brilliant. But does brilliant translate to being an effective shepherd? Many have expressed a desirable quality of leadership to be wisdom, many times described as intelligence with experience. Brilliance is lower on the list.
As far as levels of communication goes, please explain what the Pontiff said, just today about separation in marriage and morality. I understand it on two levels. The Church already has provisions for marriage separation. The higher level of the statement could make it possible for one, however, to question the implications of the statement regarding future theological justification for divorce and remarriage.
Quick comments, while well intended, have repercussions on all levels. In the days of newsprint and no internet, a story followed the comment. Not today-only the quote is flashed around the world instantly. No follow up. And the Pontiff used the internet?
To have to explain and justify EVERY statement shows a definite lack of communication skills or (in Washington DC terminology) misspeak.
I find it interesting the almost silence concerning the current crisis of the persecution of Catholics and Christians worldwide.

Fr. Z wrote “Of course we have to figure out what it means in this encyclical, not merely in some other source.”

Which is precisely why I find it so difficult to read what Pope Francis says. It’s bad enough that his grammar is atrocious at times. However, when Francis so often neglects to tell us what he means, and uses phrases that are foreign to us, or just plain brand-new (remember the one about neo-Pelagians in Evangelii gaudium?), then how is Charlie-Catholic-in-the-pew (who, incidentally, is probably not Jesuit-educated) to know just what Francis means or is even talking about?

Is this a problem with Francis’ style of speaking or does the problem originate with the interpreter and his style of interpreting/writing?

And does the quality of being “brilliant” really reside in someone who cannot make himself understood to the ordinary man on the street? And who has so often spouted off-the-cuff remarks that need to be revisited the next day by the damage control experts? I am not stupid by any means, nor am I a “genius” when it comes to the IQ scale, but when so many bits and pieces of Pope Francis’s speeches and writings are simply incomprehensible to me . . . I have to wonder what is wrong where.

discens says, “Take a look at what he recently said in Turin.” How, exactly, can one do that? For example, in the case where (according to the Vatican Radio author(s) ) “Pope Francis spoke to the young people “from the heart” for more than half an hour, laying aside his prepared remarks (which he promised would later be published).” What’s to take a look at?

Philip Pullella 0f Reuters, on the other hand, presented some of these (purported) remarks as direct quotations. One is “It makes me think of … people […] who call themselves Christian and they manufacture weapons. That leads to a bit a distrust, doesn’t it?” Was this meant to apply to arms manufacture under Pope Beatus Pius IX? Is there anything about it that prevents it being so applied? Another is, “The great powers had the pictures of the railway lines that brought the trains to the concentration camps like Auschwitz to kill Jews, Christians, homosexuals, everybody. Why didn’t they bomb (the railway lines)?” The failure of, among others, people in authority who presumably “call[ed] themselves Christian” to use more weapons they were instrumental in having manufactured, is also seen as leading “to a bit a distrust” – ? How would what Mr. Pullella calls “a long, rambling talk” characterized by such remarks “make the First World elites squirm”?

WYMiriam. Encyclicals are written in Vatican-speak. Even the Latin has to be Vatican-speak (as the inimitable Fr. Reggie Foster, whose job was to produce the Latin, often complained). And Charlie-Catholic-in-the-pew, or should we rather say the Christifidelis, likely won’t read the encyclical anyway (nor indeed should he necessarily read it). The Christifidelis will get the appeal to St. Francis and his love for God’s creation, because he’ll at least get the title of the Encyclical. And the title is all he’ll need. Any who want to read further and to weigh words and plumb meanings, which the Encyclical requires, are welcome to do so. But then they better be ready for the hard work of weighing words and plumbing meanings. If they aren’t, let them read St. Francis’ canticle Laudato Si’ and be content with that, leaving the rest to others.

Venerator Sti Lot. Well clearly you and I got to learn what Francis said in Turin even if the remarks were off the cuff and not yet published. The Elites in the West earn billions in making and selling arms, and in provoking wars for the arms to be used in so that they can make and sell more arms. Francis’ remarks about Auschwitz are a clever turning of the tables. The Elites deplore the Nazis and Antisemites, and make a big song and dance whenever anyone they hate says something that can be construed as or twisted into Antisemitism. But the behavior of the Allies in the last war proves that the Elites don’t really care about what they say they care about (they could have stopped the trains and didn’t; so are they not themselves guilty of Antisemitism?). The Elites haven’t changed. They are the same old hypocrites. Francis is exposing their hypocrisy. Turin was a first example. There will be plenty of others. Watch this space, as they say.

Search Fr. Z’s Blog

Search for:

CHRISTMAS SHOPPING? Please, always come here first!

Enter Amazon through my search box and I will get a small percentage of what you spend. (Pssst - Can't see the search box? Turn off your "ad-blocker" for this site!)

Amazon.com WidgetsPS: I added an Amazon Search Box for the UK at the bottom of the blog page. Copy and paste titles I mention into those boxes and - BAZINGA! - results appear.

“This blog is like a fusion of the Baroque ‘salon’ with its well-tuned harpsichord around which polite society gathered for entertainment and edification and, on the other hand, a Wild West “saloon” with its out-of-tune piano and swinging doors, where everyone has a gun and something to say. Nevertheless, we try to point our discussions back to what it is to be Catholic in this increasingly difficult age, to love God, and how to get to heaven.” – Fr. Z

CLICK and say your Daily Offering!

"We as Catholics have not properly combated (the culture) because we have not been taught our Catholic Faith, especially in the depth needed to address these grave evils of our time. This is a failure of catechesis both of children and young people that has been going on for fifty years. It is being addressed, but it needs much more radical attention... What has also contributed greatly to the situation is an exaltation of the virtue of tolerance which is falsely seen as the virtue which governs all other virtues. In other words, we should tolerate other people in their immoral actions to the extent that we seem also to accept the moral wrong. Tolerance is a virtue, but it is certainly not the principal virtue; the principal virtue is charity... Charity means speaking the truth. I have encountered it (not speaking the truth) many times myself as a priest and bishop. It is something we simply need to address. There is far too much silence — people do not want to talk about it because the topic is not 'politically correct.' But we cannot be silent any longer."

Paypal Donation

"Where priest and people together face the same way, what we have is a cosmic orientation and also in interpretation of the Eucharist in terms of resurrection and trinitarian theology. Hence it is also an interpretation in terms of parousia, a theology of hope, in which every Mass is an approach to the return of Christ."

"In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. ... If all Catholics are obliged to oppose the legal recognition of homosexual unions, Catholic politicians are obliged to do so in a particular way, in keeping with their responsibility as politicians." CDF 2003

One of the most dangerous errors is that civilization is automatically bound to increase and spread. The lesson of history is the opposite; civilization is a rarity, attained with difficulty and easily lost. The normal state of humanity is barbarism, just as the normal surface of the planet is salt water. Land looms large in our imagination and civilization in history books, only because sea and savagery are to us less interesting.
— C. S. Lewis

Some words of wisdom…

The more vigorously the primacy was displayed, the more the question came up about the extent and and limits of [papal] authority, which of course, as such, had never been considered. After the Second Vatican Council, the impression arose that the pope really could do anything in liturgical matters, especially if he were acting on the mandate of an ecumenical council. Eventually, the idea of the givenness of the liturgy, the fact that one cannot do with it what one will, faded from the public consciousness of the West. In fact, the First Vatican Council had in no way defined the pope as an absolute monarch. On the contrary, it presented him as the guarantor of obedience to the revealed Word. The pope's authority is bound to the Tradition of faith. … The authority of the pope is not unlimited; it is at the service of Sacred Tradition.

"The Catholic Church is an institution I am bound to hold divine—but for unbelievers a proof of its divinity might be found in the fact that no merely human institution conducted with such knavish imbecility would have lasted a fortnight."

For contemplation…

"Latin is a precise, essential language. It will be abandoned, not because it is unsuitable for the new requirements of progress, but because the new men will not be suitable for it. When the age of demagogues and charlatans begins, a language like Latin will no longer be useful, and any oaf will be able to give a speech in public and talk in such a way that he will not be kicked off the stage. The secret to this will consist in the fact that, by making use of words that are general, elusive, and sound good, he will be able to speak for an hour without saying anything. With Latin, this is impossible."

- - Giovanni Guareschi

Support them with prayer and fasting.

Click for Car Magnets

Help the Sisters. They have a building project. Get great soap (gifts, etc.) while helping REAL nuns!

Great data SIM and device for travel.

Leave VOICE MAIL for Fr. Z

Nota bene: I do not answer these numbers or this Skype address. You won't get me "live". I check for messages regularly.

WDTPRS

020 8133 4535

651-447-6265

Let us pray…

Grant unto thy Church, we beseech
Thee, O merciful God, that She, being
gathered together by the Holy Ghost, may
be in no wise troubled by attack from her
foes.
O God, who by sin art offended and by
penance pacified, mercifully regard the
prayers of Thy people making supplication
unto Thee,and turn away the scourges of
Thine anger which we deserve for our sins.
Almighty and Everlasting God, in
whose Hand are the power and the
government of every realm: look down upon
and help the Christian people that the heathen
nations who trust in the fierceness of their
own might may be crushed by the power of
thine Arm. Through our Lord Jesus Christ,
Thy Son, who liveth and reigneth with Thee
in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God, world
without end. R. Amen.

Yes, Fr. Z is taking ads…

A great hymnal…

Mystic Monk Coffee also has TEA! UPDATE LINK

Because it matters what children read…

I carry one of these super-strong rosaries in my spare mag pouch! The Swiss Guards have them too!

The Swiss Guard have these rosaries!For the story clickHERE and HERE (esp. 18:00)

Because you don’t know when you are going to need to move fast or get along without the supermarket…

My Wish Lists

Main Wishlist Kindle WishlistAudio WishlistHam Radio ListNEW

Food For Thought

“The legalization of the termination of pregnancy is none other than the authorization given to an adult, with the approval of an established law, to take the lives of children yet unborn and thus incapable of defending themselves. It is difficult to imagine a more unjust situation, and it is very difficult to speak of obsession in a matter such as this, where we are dealing with a fundamental imperative of every good conscience — the defense of the right to life of an innocent and defenseless human being.”

A morsel for thought…

"If your work is strong enough for someone to hate you, it's strong enough for someone to love you. The middle is what you should fear."

- Sean McCabe @seanwes

For your consideration…

"One of the most dangerous errors is that civilization is automatically bound to increase and spread. The lesson of history is the opposite; civilization is a rarity, attained with difficulty and easily lost. The normal state of humanity is barbarism, just as the normal surface of the planet is salt water. Land looms large in our imagination and civilization in history books, only because sea and savagery are to us less interesting."

- C.S. Lewis

More food for thought:

“I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square. His successor will pick up the shards of a ruined society and slowly help rebuild civilization, as the church has done so often in human history.”

Francis Card. George

Fr. Z’s stuff is everywhere

Help support Fr. Z’s Gospel of Life work at no cost to you. Do you need a Real Estate Agent? Calling these people is the FIRST thing you should do!

They find you a pro-life agent in your area who commits to giving a portion of the fee to a pro-life group!

"It will never be known what acts of cowardice have been committed for fear of not looking sufficiently progressive."

Charles Pierre PéguyNotre Patrie, 1905

"If I ought to write the truth, I am of the mind that I ought to flee all meetings of bishops, because I have never seen any happy or satisfactory outcome to any council, nor one that has deterred evils more than it has occasioned their acceptance and growth."

St. Gregory Nazianzus
ep. 131 - AD 382

“We will conquer your Rome, break your crosses, and enslave your women. If we do not reach that time, then our children and grandchildren will reach it, and they will sell your sons as slaves at the slave market.”

To set up a recurring, monthly donation via PAYPAL (even a small one) go to the bottom of this blog and look for the drop down menu! Do you want yet another alternative to PayPal? I have set up an account with
CONTINUE TO GIVE
Get a link to donate via CONTINUE TO GIVE using your smart phone.
SEND MESSAGE:
4827563
TO:
715-803-4772
They take a larger percent taste, but they are an alternative.

I remember benefactors in my prayers and periodically say Mass for your intention.

This catechism helped to bring Fr. Z into the Catholic Church!

Be a “Zed-Head”!

Fathers, you don’t know who might show up! It could be a “big fish” of one sort or other…

And... GO TO CONFESSION!

“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

What people say…

"Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a traditionalist blogger who has never shied from picking fights with priests, bishops or cardinals when liturgical abuses are concerned."

- Kractivism

"Father John Zuhlsdorf is a crank"
"Father Zuhlsdorf drives me crazy"
"the hate-filled Father John Zuhlsford" [sic]
"Father John Zuhlsdorf, the right wing priest who has a penchant for referring to NCR as the 'fishwrap'"

- Michael Sean Winters

"Fr Z is a true phenomenon of the information age: a power blogger and a priest."

- Anna Arco

“Given that Rorate Coeli and Shea are mad at Fr. Z, I think it proves Fr. Z knows what he is doing and he is right.”

- Comment

"Let me be clear. Fr. Z is a shock jock, mostly. His readership is vast and touchy. They like to be provoked and react with speed and fury."

- Sam Rocha

"Father Z’s Blog is a bright star on a cloudy night."

- Comment

"A cross between Kung Fu Panda and Wolverine."

- Anonymous

Fr. Z is officially a hybrid of Gandalf and Obi-Wan XD

- Comment

Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a scrappy blogger popular with the Catholic right.

Support Military Chaplains!

Click to donate

Food For Thought

“Men are qualified for civil liberty in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites. . . . Society cannot exist unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.”

More stuff…

Archives

ENTRY CALENDAR

Do you use my blog often? Is it helpful to you?

If so, please consider subscribing to send a monthly donation. That way I have steady income I can plan on, and you wind up regularly on my list of benefactors for whom I pray and for whom I periodically say Holy Mass.

Some options

Admin Stuff

The opinions expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect the positions of any of the Catholic Church's entities with which I am involved. They are my own. Opinions expressed by commentators in the comments belong to the commentators.